Ohio Stadium Article Pictures

Photo Courtesy of Tom Rinto










This horseshoe and accompanying quote by Chic Harley hang above the players exit to the stadium field. Players jump to hit the horseshoe before each home game.










Blake Williams, Student Journalist

This space on the Huntington Club level of the stadium is used for the 250-300 non-football events each year. This image is of a dinner hosted on Feb. 25.

Extra Credit Ethics Critique

Tough economic times have affected job markets across the country and journalism is no exception. However, college students taking work from those in the field with degrees may be more unique to the profession. As the article J-Schools to the Rescue? points out, the industry has started “to have journalism students, who will work for course credit, fill the gaps left by the pros whom the news outlets could no longer afford to pay.” This creates some ethical issues for all involved. How should students feel about taking positions from their future peers? Will they be able to find jobs once they do graduate or should they be concerned that college students will continue to fill these positions? Should editors feel guilty about casting aside professionals for inexperienced college students? And should they be concerned about sacrificing quality?

The article points out that the New York Times cut 200 newsroom jobs the past year. This is clearly not easy for the ones losing their jobs, but one must realize how difficult it also is for the managers and editors making the decisions. Incidents like this have lead to students from universities like New York University, Indiana University, the University of California Berkley and others to fill the pages of professional newspapers “in the name of experiential learning” according to the article. However if students continue to fill these jobs, then what are students gaining experience for? If the journalism job market is as bleak as this article on jobspage.com suggest, then while being able to put this experience on a resume really be beneficial? If so, then, for good or bad, these few universities who have these relationships with newspapers will become the only schools with successful journalism graduates. The article also points out that “Some believe journalism schools are exploiting students by maintaining high enrollment levels despite the contraction of the market for professional journalists — a system that guarantees a large population of out-of-work, debt-addled graduates.” This leads to the question, is this the schools responsibility? If students want to pursue a journalism degree, regardless of the difficulty in finding work, why should the schools turn them away? However the schools should certainly be upfront about the difficulty in succeeding in this field.

Journalism schools should be focused on both their own success and the success of their graduates. News organizations need them to be producing talented reporters and in this capacity they are succeeding. However, they are doing this at a rate that causes these news organizations to out the old experienced and expensive journalists for young, inexperienced and cheap (even free) journalists. In this sense they are not fulfilling their obligation to their graduates. They are facilitating a system that displaces former graduates for more recent ones or ones who have not yet graduated. In this sense they are loyal to their current students and very recent graduates but this loyalty does not extend past a few years.
However, if the article is accurate when it addresses the potential that allowing these current students to cover local issues is akin to making the decision “to cover local issues with journalism students or at all” the we have a different issue. In this case the journalism students are not at fault. They are simply meeting a need that would not otherwise be met. Also this free labor could be important in keeping local governing bodies accountable as they would not otherwise be reported on. This is a very crucial role.

The issue of content is not truly an ethical one. It is really a matter of keeping the reputation of both the university and the news organization in good standing. Clearly both will be interested in keeping good reputations to they will both monitor the quality of the free reporting. From the standpoint of the student, I would be thrilled to be given the opportunity those at NYU have received. However, this can still be done through internships. Most importantly though, students do not go into journalism for economic reasons. As this article demonstrates, the average salary for individuals with graduate degrees in journalism is only $40,000. Nicholas Lemann the dean of the Columbia School of Journalism points out that "[He’s] never met a single person in 35 years who went into journalism out of pure economic reason." It really boils down to the individuals involved. It makes monetary sense for organizations to use free labor and initially it makes sense for students to take the opportunity. Each person must decide if it makes sense for them personally, professionally, and ethically.

Ethics Critique

Social media sites such as Face book, Myspace, and Twitter are becoming a necessary tool in the journalist’s arsenal. However, as the article by Pamela J. Podger, The Limits of Control, points out these sites create almost as many problems as they do solutions. Where to draw the ethical line when it comes to new media is a difficult question and one that has no clear answer.

First and foremost I agree with the thoughts of Mary Hartney of the Baltimore Sun when she says that any policy on social media must be “a living document.” These types of new technology are constantly changing and the regulations and policies governing them must adapt as well. We cannot predict what new journalistically helpful or harmful tools Facebook or Twitter will add to their sites next year, next month, or even tomorrow. All policies must be open to change.

Though there is no absolute solution, the best option is for reporters to have separate profiles on all of these sites for their professional and personal lives. As the article states, “One is for friends, family, and classmates, while the other is for sources, bosses and coworkers.” However the solution is not this simple. Further guidelines are necessary. The Washington Post does not approve of two separate pages because they worry about “Who you are on one page and who on another?” according to the article. The Wall Street Journal agrees. The Journal's policies, some of which can be found here, seem short sighted to me. The journalist is the same person on both pages but simply makes clear which page is personal and which page is professional. Making this distinction clear is essential. Furthermore, you must use restraint on your personal page. Even though it is not your professional page, you are still a representative of your media outlet. However, this is no different than a teachers Facebook page representing their school district.

When using your professional page you should always identify yourself as a journalist. If you do not tell them ahead of time you should not use the information. This is parallel to a source going off the record in an interview. On these sites, even your designated personal page, you should be careful of obvious political bias. However, if your reporting is objective it should speak for itself and give you credibility. As the article points out, regardless of social media use “you don’t want anybody to read your story and discern what your political leanings are.” The New York Times policy on Facebook asks that reporters leave their political preference portion of their profile blank. This seems like a minor sacrifice for reporters to make.

We must try to put ourselves in the positions of those involved in these decisions. AS much as editors may dislike it, reporters are human being first and journalists second. The social media phenomenon is a worldwide event and it is not fair to exclude journalists from it. They are complete people and deserved to be treated as such. Furthermore, as Jeff Jarvis points out that these sites “provide the opportunity for reporters and editors to come out from behind the institutional voice of the paper -- a voice that is less and less trusted -- and to become human.” This is an opportunity for newspapers to regain public trust. If the public can see that real people are reporting these events, perhaps they will be more trustworthy. I acknowledge that editors have legitimate concerns. They need their reporters to be representatives of their organization, be cautious of safety issues, and make sure that they are not scooped by their own employees. However, I side with the individual freedom of the reporter, not the organization. Continue using social media, but with caution.